Harvard morality test

Usually morality is such a simple thing. Not so when you take this test:

moral.wjh.harvard.edu...

Am I the only one who took this test?

I doed the test man, and I killed one on the train tracks, but I wouldn't throw the same guy at the others to save them if I was a passer-by not a train-driver.

Because I didn't click any option for feedback, I get no feedback, which left me kind of flat and deflated, like an audience with George W Bush.

I doed the test man, and I killed one on the train tracks, but I wouldn't throw the same guy at the others to save them if I was a passer-by not a train-driver.

Because I didn't click any option for feedback, I get no feedback, which left me kind of flat and deflated, like an audience with George W Bush.

I doed the test man, and I killed one on the train tracks, but I wouldn't throw the same guy at the others to save them if I was a passer-by not a train-driver.

Because I didn't click any option for feedback, I get no feedback, which left me kind of flat and deflated, like an audience with George W Bush.

I doed the test man, and I killed one on the train tracks, but I wouldn't throw the same guy at the others to save them if I was a passer-by not a train-driver.

Because I didn't click any option for feedback, I get no feedback, which left me kind of flat and deflated, like an audience with George W Bush.

I doed the test man, and I killed one on the train tracks, but I wouldn't throw the same guy at the others to save them if I was a passer-by not a train-driver.

Because I didn't click any option for feedback, I get no feedback, which left me kind of flat and deflated, like an audience with George W Bush.

I doed the test man, and I killed one on the train tracks, but I wouldn't throw the same guy at the others to save them if I was a passer-by not a train-driver.

Because I didn't click any option for feedback, I get no feedback, which left me kind of flat and deflated, like an audience with George W Bush.

No, I did not do the test five times. Could a Mod please fix the above mess which is a problem not created by me, except for one extra click in frustration....

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
No, I did not do the test five times. Could a Mod please fix the above mess which is a problem not created by me, except for one extra click in frustration....

Y'know, MA....posting 5 times doesn't give you extra points...
I know that's what you were doing.

What an odd little test. Interesting though. Reminded me that I really wouldn't want to be in the position as Ned and/or Edward.

-B.

Wow MA. You got some big screen time there

I'd like to see people take this test too. I'll take it and post the results.

www.humanmetrics.com...

Banshee, ktpr

The doctors never told me I was having sextuplets.

Notice the IMPOSSIBILITY of the situation, as 5 of them were produced at the same time, and one two minutes later.

Birth announcement here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You will also notice just how analagous this is to the five guys on one train track and the one guy on the other.

I'm a INTP

Introverted 22
Intuitive 89
Thinking 28
Perceiving 22

with keirsey.com...

and that morality test... huh? no grade. well I at least I thought it was morally wrong to throw the switch. You should never kill another, directly.

edit- btw intp stands for intelligent person

edit - www.braintypes.com... gives the types and what they 'are'


[Edited on 11-9-2003 by ktprktpr]

[Edited on 11-9-2003 by ktprktpr]

I have been ENTJ for about 15 years.

I took it.
I answered not permissable for the train choice with Denise choosing either 1 dead or 5 dead.
I also answered not permissable for the Dr. Brown patient one as well.

Reason for the Dr. Brown one was obviously because it is not Dr. Browns place to decide to take another persons healthy life even if it is to save 5 others. The healthy patient could have offered to save the others on the other hand. That one is fairly easy I think for most people.

The one with the trains was similar to the Dr. Brown one and really could be answered either way in my opinion and still be morally correct. I chose NO simply because NO also could include what I saw as a hidden 3rd choice. Choice 1 change tracks killing 1 to save 5. Choice 2 Don't change killing 5 and letting the 1 live. Choice 3 Do nothing to change a situation that was not Denise's doing in the first place, letting things run their course without intervention. Since the 5 could have been baby killers and the one a decent person or vise versa and was impossible for Denise to learn more about them at the time she was not obligated to do anything nor could she be sure what she chose was truely the best choice. Had there been an option for "Both or Neither or N/A" I would have answered that but since there wasn't I chose the option that held choice 2 & 3 over the choice holding only 1. I hope that makes sense anyway, as I don't think I can explain it any better. So if you don't understand it, screw ya, too bad. I do not feel morally responsible to have to explain it better...

I did the first test about the train tracks etc.

I chose differently with the two. I would of hit the switch to kill the 1 person to save five but I would not of pushed 1 person onto the tracks to save 5.

My answer why was:

If you were close enough to throw a man onto the tracks than surely you are close enough to throw yourself onto the tracks. The issue becomes are you willing to sacrafice your life for the other five men. To me I would not. Throwing a switch is simpler in your head. A simple maths game 5 vs 1 not noing any of the 6 people involved. When it becomes an option of killing someone who was in the exact same situation as you makes the choice a lot more complex.

What did other people write in the explanation part???

I answered the same way as you boosai.

I didn't write an explanation, but my response to the bystander's moral dilemma was different to the train driver's one for a less moral reason, i.e. that I would not do it as a bystander but I would do it as a contracted employee of the train service.

That decision (to switch tracks as the driver) would probably actually cost the rail company more in the long run after investigations, but I would feel better off and need less counselling after causing or witnessing one fatality under my wheels rather than five.

In the case of not throwing one guy across the tracks to save five, my reasoning was more that I would be jailled for murder or manslaughter, without doubt. I would not have even considered throwing myself instead. Hats off to you for that, I hope you are around if I'm ever on the tracks with a train hurtling at me.

a very interesting test. this is what i had wrote...


Well in the first scenario. You are supposed to Physicly throw the person infront of the train. In a court of law that could be seen as murder. I know the whole "needs of the many outway the needs of the one or few", but it still doesn't seem right to me. It would be best to give that guy a choice rather then just push him in. In the 2nd scenario it's a little differnt. you are not pushing some one into a train. You are only flipping a switch. You don't have chance to ask. This is up to you to decide. The previous scenario is a choice for the "heavy" guy to make.

I would be making sure the guy I was thinking about chucking onto the tracks wouldnt be thinkin the same thing and squaring up to give me a good push in the back. Get as far away from those tracks as possible...

Cant get any of the links to work???